Is CSX the best solution?

[kellner at ue.ipc.hiroshima-u.ac.jp]

>Another disadvantage of any system that uses the extended character set is
>the very fragile nature of these codes ( i.e. those higher than 127).
>If the document has to be converted from one format to another (say from
>WP to MS Word or from WP5 to WP) then there are always strange results with
>the extended character set.

What "strange results" are you referring to? I usually convert from WP 5.1
to Winword - 
naturally, the extended character sets are different, so I have to first
convert the WP5.1-diacritics into some ASCII-convention (such as "a@" for
long a), read the file in WinWord and then run a macro which converts the
ASCII-preliminaries into the TTF-font. 

Otherwise, I have never perceived any "strange results" (not even when
converting from WP 5.1 to WordPerfect for Windows 6.0aJ). 

Birgit Kellner
Institute for Indian Philosophy
University of Hiroshima